Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2012-08-16 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of mié ago 15 18:30:40 -0400 2012: On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 01:20:17AM +0300, Ants Aasma wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: I wonder what happens if files in the same subdir are grouped in a

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2012-08-16 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:15:24AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of mié ago 15 18:30:40 -0400 2012: On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 01:20:17AM +0300, Ants Aasma wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: I

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2012-08-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 01:20:17AM +0300, Ants Aasma wrote: On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote: I wonder what happens if files in the same subdir are grouped in a subgraph.  Is that possible? Possible, and done. Also added possivility to add

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2011-09-06 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Ants Aasma's message of mar sep 06 12:40:04 -0300 2011: On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote: What I wouldn't mind seeing is a graph of all includes and what they include. This might help figure out what layering violations there are like the one that

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2011-09-05 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: Clean up the #include mess a little. walsender.h should depend on xlog.h, not vice versa. (Actually, the inclusion was circular until a couple hours ago, which was even sillier; but Bruce broke it in the expedient rather than logically correct direction.) Because of that

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2011-09-05 Thread Greg Stark
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Well, I assume we are done for another five years.  The includes removed were minimal, especially considering five years of work. What I wouldn't mind seeing is a graph of all includes and what they include. This might help

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2011-09-05 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 15:55, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote: On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Well, I assume we are done for another five years.  The includes removed were minimal, especially considering five years of work. What I wouldn't mind seeing is

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2011-09-05 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Excerpts from Magnus Hagander's message of lun sep 05 11:02:23 -0300 2011: On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 15:55, Greg Stark st...@mit.edu wrote: On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Bruce Momjian br...@momjian.us wrote: Well, I assume we are done for another five years.  The includes removed were

Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up the #include mess a little.

2011-09-05 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@commandprompt.com writes: I am not sure it is really feasible to build a complete graph for all headers. We have too many of them and too many dependencies. Yeah, it's the too many dependencies aspect that is bothering me. The only concrete idea I've come up with so